Conversion from Alloplastic to Autologous Breast Reconstruction: What Are the Inciting Factors?

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Locally advanced breast cancer patients should be cautious about the immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy: a pooling analysis of safety and efficacy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024
   Pooled it
2. Microsurgical Strategies in Post-Radiation and Revision Breast Reconstruction: Optimizing Outcomes in High-Risk Patients.Cancers · 2025
   Review
3. Reverse-flow Thoracodorsal Artery: An Additional Perfusion Strategy for Breast Microsurgical Flaps.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as